IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v96y2010i1p39-49.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Dynamic Perspective in Freeman’s Stakeholder Model

Author

Listed:
  • Yves Fassin

    ()

Abstract

Stakeholder literature has acknowledged the need to complement the extant theory on stakeholder management by more dynamic perspectives. This article makes use of the recent terminology of stakewatcher and stakeseeker to illustrate the dynamic aspect of stakeholder theory transposed in the graphical representation of Freeman’s stakeholder model. Presenting a few selected case studies, it applies the scheme on the concept of value responsibility chain; it exemplifies the role of stakeseekers in various forms of activism, from shareholders, NGOs and government, in the stakeholder mobilization process. The paper clarifies how stakewatchers and stakeseekers can profoundly affect stakeholder salience, especially in crises. The transposition and integration of the dynamic aspect of stakeholder theory into the graphical representation strengthen the forceful pedagogical value of the Freeman’s stakeholder graphical model.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Yves Fassin, 2010. "A Dynamic Perspective in Freeman’s Stakeholder Model," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 39-49, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:96:y:2010:i:1:p:39-49
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-011-0942-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10551-011-0942-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:dau:papers:123456789/406 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Yves Fassin, 2008. "Imperfections and Shortcomings of the Stakeholder Model’s Graphical Representation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 80(4), pages 879-888, July.
    3. Langtry, Bruce, 1994. "Stakeholders and the Moral Responsibilities of Business," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 431-443, October.
    4. Doh, Jonathan P. & Teegen, Hildy, 2002. "Nongovernmental organizations as institutional actors in international business: theory and implications," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 11(6), pages 665-684, December.
    5. Phillips, Robert, 2003. "Stakeholder Legitimacy," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 25-41, January.
    6. Marcoux, Alexei M., 2003. "A Fiduciary Argument Against Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, January.
    7. Benjamin Neville & Bulent Menguc, 2006. "Stakeholder Multiplicity: Toward an Understanding of the Interactions between Stakeholders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(4), pages 377-391, July.
    8. Phillips, Robert & Freeman, R. Edward & Wicks, Andrew C., 2003. "What Stakeholder Theory is Not," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 479-502, October.
    9. Orts, Eric W. & Strudler, Alan, 2002. "The Ethical and Environmental Limits of Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 215-233, April.
    10. Elms, Heather & Phillips, Robert A., 2009. "Private Security Companies and Institutional Legitimacy: Corporate and Stakeholder Responsibility," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(3), pages 403-432, July.
    11. Christopher Stoney & Diana Winstanley, 2001. "Stakeholding: Confusion or Utopia? Mapping the Conceptual Terrain," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 603-626, July.
    12. Salma Damak-Ayadi & Yvon Pesqueux, 2005. "stakeholder theory in perspective," Post-Print halshs-00154129, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fabio Blanco-Mesa & Anna M. Gil-Lafuente & José M. Merigó, 2018. "Subjective stakeholder dynamics relationships treatment: a methodological approach using fuzzy decision-making," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 441-472, December.
    2. Filippo Bazzanella, 2019. "Perceptions and Role of Tourist Destination Residents Compared to Other Event Stakeholders in a Small-Scale Sports Event. The Case of the FIS World Junior Alpine Ski Championships 2019 in Val di Fassa," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(24), pages 1-1, December.
    3. Donal Crilly, 2013. "Recasting Enterprise Strategy: Towards Stakeholder Research That Matters to General Managers," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(8), pages 1427-1447, December.
    4. Yves Fassin, 2012. "Stakeholder Management, Reciprocity and Stakeholder Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 83-96, August.
    5. Mohammad A. Ali, 2017. "Stakeholder Salience for Stakeholder Firms: An Attempt to Reframe an Important Heuristic Device," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 153-168, August.
    6. Andreas Hoepner & Arleta Majoch, 2016. "Pension Funds and the Principles for Responsible Investment: Multiplying Stakeholder Salience?," ICMA Centre Discussion Papers in Finance icma-dp2016-07, Henley Business School, Reading University.
    7. Diego F. Uribe & Isabel Ortiz-Marcos & Ángel Uruburu, 2018. "What Is Going on with Stakeholder Theory in Project Management Literature? A Symbiotic Relationship for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(4), pages 1-1, April.
    8. Yakovleva, Natalia & Vazquez-Brust, Diego Alfonso, 2018. "Multinational mining enterprises and artisanal small-scale miners: From confrontation to cooperation," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 52-62.
    9. Chris Mason & John Simmons, 2014. "Embedding Corporate Social Responsibility in Corporate Governance: A Stakeholder Systems Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 119(1), pages 77-86, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:96:y:2010:i:1:p:39-49. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.